Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32887573›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2020

Interconnectivity between molecular subtypes and tumor stage in colorectal cancer.

R R J Coebergh van den Braak, S Ten Hoorn, A M Sieuwerts, J B Tuynman, M Smid, S M Wilting, J W M Martens, C J A Punt, J A Foekens, J P Medema and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical Challenges of Consensus Molecular Subtype CMS4 Colon Cancer in the Era of Precision Medicine.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Early Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Risk-Based Selection Strategies for Adjuvant Treatment in Stage II Colon Cancer: The Potential Value of Prognostic Molecular Markers.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Advances in colon cancer research: in vitro and animal models.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2021
    Review
  18. Prognostic value of the PrPOncoimmunology · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

R R J Coebergh van den BraakDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
S Ten HoornLaboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A M SieuwertsDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Wytemaweg 80, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J B TuynmanDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M SmidDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Wytemaweg 80, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
S M WiltingDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Wytemaweg 80, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J W M MartensDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Wytemaweg 80, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
C J A PuntDepartment of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J A FoekensDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Wytemaweg 80, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J P MedemaLaboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J N M IJzermansDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, 's Gravendijkwal 230, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
L VermeulenLaboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.vermeulen@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6066-789X

Funding

Fonds NutsOhra 0903-011H2020 European Research Council ERG-StG 638193KWF Kankerbestrijding (UVA2014-7245 and UVA2013-6331Maag Lever Darm Stichting MLDS-CDG 14-03New York Stem Cell Foundation NYSCF-I-R43Worldwide Cancer Research 14-1164ZonMw Vidi 016.156.308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are profound individual differences in clinical outcomes between colorectal cancers (CRCs) presenting with identical stage of disease. Molecular stratification, in conjunction with the traditional TNM staging, is a promising way to predict patient outcomes. We investigated the interconnectivity between tumor stage and tumor biology reflected by the Consensus Molecular Subtypes (CMSs) in CRC, and explored the possible value of these insights in patients with stage II colon cancer.

methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis using clinical records and gene expression profiling in a meta-cohort of 1040 CRC patients. The interconnectivity of tumor biology and disease stage was assessed by investigating the association between CMSs and TNM classification. In order to validate the clinical applicability of our findings we employed a meta-cohort of 197 stage II colon cancers.

resultsCMS4 was significantly more prevalent in advanced stages of disease (stage I 9.8% versus stage IV 38.5%, p < 0.001). The observed differential gene expression between cancer stages is at least partly explained by the biological differences as reflected by CMS subtypes. Gene signatures for stage III-IV and CMS4 were highly correlated (r = 0.77, p < 0.001). CMS4 cancers showed an increased progression rate to more advanced stages (CMS4 compared to CMS2: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.08-1.46). Patients with a CMS4 cancer had worse survival in the high-risk stage II tumors compared to the total stage II cohort (5-year DFS 41.7% versus 100.0%, p = 0.008).

conclusionsConsiderable interconnectivity between tumor biology and tumor stage in CRC exists. This implies that the TNM stage, in addition to the stage of progression, might also reflect distinct biological disease entities. These insights can potentially be utilized to optimize identification of high-risk stage II colon cancers.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeAgedColonic NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMicrosatellite InstabilityMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRiskCMSColorectal cancerMolecular subtypeTNMTumor biology

Identifiers

PMID32887573
PMCPMC7473811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.